 |
|
 |
|
|
Access State and Federal Case Law, plus U.S. Supreme Court cases — for free!
Click on any of the case links below to view the full text of that case — for free — through lexisONE®, a legal research and news service from LexisNexis®. Login is required — registration is free!
While viewing the full text of the case, select from upgrade options to Shepardize® or view the fully-featured case on lexis.com including Core Terms, Shepard's® Signals, Case Summaries, Print Options, and more. lexisONE offers access to comprehensive content and flexible services for faster, more efficient legal research. Review our flexible LexisNexis® subscriptions offered through daily, weekly or monthly research packages.
| State v. Clark, No. 7-030 / 06-0596,
COURT OF APPEALS OF IOWA, February 14, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Court did not fail to give specific reasons for imposing consecutive sentences for 3 convictions; inter alia, court cited defendant's lengthy criminal history and specifically mentioned she had had 7 convictions for theft in last 9 years, and noted that two prior prison terms had not curtailed defendant's inclination to commit thefts and assaults.
|
|||||
| State v. Elsberry, No. 6-1069 / 06-0597,
COURT OF APPEALS OF IOWA, February 14, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's conviction of driving under revocation in violation of Iowa Code § 321J.21 was vacated because instruction that revocation of driving privileges referred to in certified driving record, was a revocation for violation of Iowa Code ch. 321J, violated due process and effectively directed a verdict on an essential element of charged crime.
|
|||||
| State v. Geiger, No. 6-1009 / 05-1915,
COURT OF APPEALS OF IOWA, February 14, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In trial for domestic assault under Iowa Code §§ 708.1, 708.2A, girlfriend's testimony that she feared for her life and that defendant was capable of blowing her up was not improper evidence of prior bad acts under Iowa R. Evid. 5.404(b); rather, it went to essential element as to victim's reaction to defendant's behavior and his intent to do harm.
|
|||||
| State v. Kemp, No. 6-1066 / 06-0469,
COURT OF APPEALS OF IOWA, February 14, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court properly denied defendant's motion to suppress after he was charged with criminal mischief in third degree, burglary in the third degree, and theft in the second degree where the police had reasonable cause to stop the vehicle defendant was in to investigate a residential burglary that had occurred minutes earlier a short distance away.
|
|||||
| State v. Parker, No. 6-944 / 05-0588,
COURT OF APPEALS OF IOWA, February 14, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Admission of evidence of 13-year-old drug convictions in defendant's trial for second-dgree robbery was improper under Iowa R. Evid. 5.609 because district court did not engage in balancing test, drugs were not connected to alleged robbery, drug convictions were not related to veracity, and value of the evidence did not outweigh prejudicial effect.
|
|||||
| State v. Paulson, No. 6-1057 / 06-0141,
COURT OF APPEALS OF IOWA, February 14, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a sexual abuse of a minor case, the trial court did not abuse its discretion in admitting detailed evidence, under Iowa Code § 701.11, of defendant's earlier conviction for lascivious acts with a child because the details were relevant, given defendant's complete denial, and because the two victims reported similar abuse during the same period.
|
|||||
| State v. Sogard, No. 6-1061 / 06-0341,
COURT OF APPEALS OF IOWA, February 14, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: There was causal connection between defendant's criminal activities and restitution ordered; although he pleaded guilty to possession of stolen property, not burglary, he stated property was in fact stolen property as set out in trial information, which was incorporated into his guilty plea, and court did not err in looking at trial information.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
